I think we're all being a bit too hard on Revkin. He is, after all, only doing his job... to support and defend the liberal editorial policies of his employers. In case you haven't noticed, the New York Times - once arguably one of the premier news sources on the planet - is slowly dying. It hasn't had a genuinely honest journalist on it's staff in more than two decades, and anyone who attempts to put the Genie back in the bottle at this late stage of the game would likely find himself out of a job.
It's also important to understand that Revkin lacks the in-depth academic background in physics and math necessary to genuinely understand the molecular radiation absorption/emission phenomena associated with the mis-named "greenhouse effect". Undergraduate biology students aren't typically handed a large plate of coupled 2nd order partial differential equations. Can you imagine the scalping knives that would come forth if Revkin were to write, "Golly, it looks like CO2 doesn't really play any serious role in the heating of the atmosphere, and the so-called "greenhouse effect" really only affects the speed with which the air cools after the sun goes down." The NYT would drop him faster than the ball in Times Square on new year's eve.